The real "GT" issue in MCPS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
This is really not true. MCPS does have GT as "defined in the world, NAGC, or VA." It is the kids they select for testing for centers. The others according to MCPS are kinda ready for above the grade English and math. MCPS has clearly said that. Highly gifted kids left in the regular classroom in each school are a very small number. The only way to take care of their needs is to increase the number of seats in centers and magnets and/or create new centers and magnets. The new rule in Maryland requires these kids get the services outside the school.

Where does it say that MCPS defines GT as those coming well prepared?

As much as you would like the Gifted and Talented to mean something else the identification and service details for Gifted and Talented in MCPS is defined by

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/ioa.pdf

All interested parents please read this and understand the context.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:anyone can get tested for the centers, all you had to do was apply. You don't even have had to be selected as gifted in 2nd grade to apply to the HGC Centers.

Yes. Second graders who did well in Global Screening are recommended to apply. Those who don't get recommended get assigned to above the grade classes in reading and math.

No. Even if you didn't do well in the global screening, you could apply to the HGC and take the test that was offered in January. You may or may not be reccomended by your home school to apply (they don't have to reccomend anyone, it's up to the student's families to take the step of completing the application, then the homeschool has steps to complete, then the test... the the decision.

Sure, when one says, "anyone can get tested for the centers, all you had to do was apply," it means ANYONE can--even if you didn't get recommended. Those who don't get recommended "get assigned to above the grade classes in reading and math." Again, yes, they can apply for the HGCs w/o being recommended. They still need the teacher recommendations and stuff. How many fail to be recommended and then succeed in getting in by taking the test?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
As much as you would like the Gifted and Talented to mean something else the identification and service details for Gifted and Talented in MCPS is defined by

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/ioa.pdf

All interested parents please read this and understand the context.

Forgot to add another document regarding regulation:

www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/ioara.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:anyone can get tested for the centers, all you had to do was apply. You don't even have had to be selected as gifted in 2nd grade to apply to the HGC Centers.

Yes. Second graders who did well in Global Screening are recommended to apply. Those who don't get recommended get assigned to above the grade classes in reading and math.

No. Even if you didn't do well in the global screening, you could apply to the HGC and take the test that was offered in January. You may or may not be reccomended by your home school to apply (they don't have to reccomend anyone, it's up to the student's families to take the step of completing the application, then the homeschool has steps to complete, then the test... the the decision.

Sure, when one says, "anyone can get tested for the centers, all you had to do was apply," it means ANYONE can--even if you didn't get recommended. Those who don't get recommended "get assigned to above the grade classes in reading and math." Again, yes, they can apply for the HGCs w/o being recommended. They still need the teacher recommendations and stuff. How many fail to be recommended and then succeed in getting in by taking the test?

Here is what MCPS says it is identifying (http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/2008/09/gifted-and-talented-abounds-suburban-schools/31062):
"Marty Creel, Montgomery’s director of gifted and talented programming, argues that every child has access to the same advanced curriculum developed over the past eight years, which are measured against rigorous college-ready standards and adaptable for advanced learners.

Of about 9,400 second-graders screened by Creel’s staff in 2006-07, 39 percent were identified as advanced, and 16 percent were noted as on the cusp, leaving fewer than half of the county’s second-graders deemed average or below.

“We’re not identifying these kids as geniuses, but as ready to work above grade level,” Creel said, adding the county has made remarkable progress in getting students to that mark."

According to the Maryland State Department of Education, the definition of GT is in Maryland law (http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/NR/rdonlyres/FCB60C1D-6CC2-4270-BDAA-153D67247324/17790/GT_Education_Sept_092.pdf). Here is what the STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SAYS:

"In Maryland, a gifted and talented (GT) student is identified as “having outstanding talent and performing—or showing the potential for performing—at remarkably high levels … when compared with other students of a similar age, experience, or environment” (Maryland Annotated Code §8-201). The law recognizes different types of gifts and talents. Some gifted students have a highly developed general intellectual capacity to think and analyze. Some show acute subject specific ability. Others excel in creative or artistic areas. And still others exhibit a keen ability to lead, influence, and organize others.

These are the students that Maryland law stipulates need different services—beyond those normally provided in a regular school program—to develop their potential."

It couldn't be clearer, no matter what the MoCo GTA says, Maryland is very, very clear "These are the students that Maryland law stipulates need different services—beyond those normally provided in a regular school program—to develop their potential."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The real important issue at Thursdays is meeting is gifted and talented education. That is the group of students MCPS serves through magnets, highly gifted centers, and such.

09:32 is talking about regular classroom instruction. MoCo has been rolling out Curriculum 2.0 and differentiated instruction at a clip. Yes, that should be discussed too. But I don't think you should hold the GT forum hostage to discussing differentiation. It is a problem in all parts of the county and it must be addressed for all of us.

I think MCPS should have a forum on differentiation and no one should hold GT hostage to advance your interests.

I don't think we can limit to the individuals "served by HGC's and magnets" because there are not enough spaces in those programs. Many highly qualified applicants are denied entry because there are just not enough seats. What happens to those students? They need also need to be served in their home schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, there are highly able kids who are rotting in regular school. There are gifted children who have to stay in the regular school because of a lack of seats or they chose not to go to a HGC/magnet. But tomorrow's forum is on GT. If we want to talk about GT kids left in the regular classroom for whatever reason--DIFFERENTIATION WONT CUT IT. HOMOGENEOUS GROUPING WONT CUT IT-because there aren't enough of them in a given school.

For the students who come in well prepared from the eastern part or the western part of the counties, in school homogeneous grouping may work. But that is another issue, right?

GT in MCPS means only one and one thing, please try to understand that. This is not GT defined in the world, NAGC, or VA, or NC. We must understand the definition before starting to debate. GT in MCPS means all the kids who are identified as such in 2nd grade. Highly gifted kids left in local school are a part of this GT population and in their case the lack of appropriate acceleration is substantially visible. So, let us ask to change the local schools’ offering.

Homogeneous or ability grouping will work if we do not worry about age based tracking. Schools should be able to provide various classes, where students enter based on ability assessment and exit based on learning. This is what we must ask for the good of all kids.




+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real important issue at Thursdays is meeting is gifted and talented education. That is the group of students MCPS serves through magnets, highly gifted centers, and such.

09:32 is talking about regular classroom instruction. MoCo has been rolling out Curriculum 2.0 and differentiated instruction at a clip. Yes, that should be discussed too. But I don't think you should hold the GT forum hostage to discussing differentiation. It is a problem in all parts of the county and it must be addressed for all of us.

I think MCPS should have a forum on differentiation and no one should hold GT hostage to advance your interests.

I don't think we can limit to the individuals "served by HGC's and magnets" because there are not enough spaces in those programs. Many highly qualified applicants are denied entry because there are just not enough seats. What happens to those students? They need also need to be served in their home schools.

Those who are qualified and denied entry to HGCs is a legitimate topic for discussion at the GT forum. IT MUST BE DISCUSSED.

What is not legitimate is the effort to sneak in a discussion about differentiation and homogeneous grouping for those who are simply well prepared.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It couldn't be clearer, no matter what the MoCo GTA says, Maryland is very, very clear "These are the students that Maryland law stipulates need different services—beyond those normally provided in a regular school program—to develop their potential."

No one can change what you believe. However, your wishful thinking is not MCPS’s law. Your interpretation of Maryland regulation, even though related, does not guide MCPS regulation. MCPS has policy IOA which defines the identification and the IOARA defines the regulation. What Marty Creel says in an interview and your interpretation of what he says is just that “your interpretation” not regulation. If you want to change the identification to include only Highly gifted students and not all the advanced learners, that would a different advocacy, may be a worthy one. Until then let us agree to use the contextual definition of GT.

GTA does not define the meaning of “GT” in MoCo, MCPS does!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
It couldn't be clearer, no matter what the MoCo GTA says, Maryland is very, very clear "These are the students that Maryland law stipulates need different services—beyond those normally provided in a regular school program—to develop their potential."

No one can change what you believe. However, your wishful thinking is not MCPS’s law. Your interpretation of Maryland regulation, even though related, does not guide MCPS regulation. MCPS has policy IOA which defines the identification and the IOARA defines the regulation. What Marty Creel says in an interview and your interpretation of what he says is just that “your interpretation” not regulation. If you want to change the identification to include only Highly gifted students and not all the advanced learners, that would a different advocacy, may be a worthy one. Until then let us agree to use the contextual definition of GT.

GTA does not define the meaning of “GT” in MoCo, MCPS does!

I this argument has become ridiculous. GTA doesn't define the meaning of GT in MCPS. MCPS does not define the meaning of GT in MCPS. Maryland law does. Schools systems are regulated by Maryland and the Maryland interpretation is what matters. I also think MCPS has accepted the Maryland definition because the Director of AEI says "“We’re not identifying these kids as geniuses, but as ready to work above grade level.” (http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/2008/09/gifted-and-talented-abounds-suburban-schools/31062)

I think you are flogging a dead horse. In MCPS GT means "the students that Maryland law stipulates need different services—beyond those normally provided in a regular school program—to develop their potential." Isn't that what Starr also said (you can hear him say it at http://www.wtop.com/?nid=183)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Thursday meeting is about GT education. That is the kids that get selected for magnets and stuff--even if they don't accept it.

09:32 is trying to sneak in a discussion about kids in the regular classroom claiming it is the "real GT."

I don't think it is the real GT. It may be a real issue but it isn't "real GT." Is 09:32 trying to get MCPS to accept that anyone who does not get selected for GT programs outside the schools if gifted?

There are lots and lots of kids who apply to magnets who are not accepted and many, many of those who are not accepted are highly-able and qualified to perform at the magnet level. The TPMS magnet accepts 125 kids (25 slots reserved for in-boundary students). This year, 800+ applied. Do you really think that ALL of those not accepted are not qualified? How about those who tested, on the entrance exam, one point below the cutoff? How about kids from a given school, from which there were too many applicants (TPMS has said publicly that they don't want to take too many applicants from one school)? How about HGC kids who don't quite make it (ditto, they don't take too many HGC kids)?

The point is, in the regular classroom, especially in the eastern part of MoCo, there are lots of highly-able kids who NEED differentiation, who NEED the challenge of enriched instruction. They need that as much as low-performing students need extra help - and under state law, they are entitled to it.

Yes, there are highly able kids who are rotting in regular school. There are gifted children who have to stay in the regular school because of a lack of seats or they chose not to go to a HGC/magnet. But tomorrow's forum is on GT. If we want to talk about GT kids left in the regular classroom for whatever reason--DIFFERENTIATION WONT CUT IT. HOMOGENEOUS GROUPING WONT CUT IT-because there aren't enough of them in a given school.

For the students who come in well prepared from the eastern part or the western part of the counties, in school homogeneous grouping may work. But that is another issue, right?

But why can't you see that it's not all or nothing? We need a comprehensive approach -- magnets for HG kids, differentiation for kids who need extra challenge in home schools, and grade skipping when appropriate.

Why can't you see that other people have needs and approaches that are different from yours? This isn't about your single-minded, self-centered campaigns for your "student letter" or whatever you call it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think MCPS should have a forum on differentiation and no one should hold GT hostage to advance your interests.

I don't think we can limit to the individuals "served by HGC's and magnets" because there are not enough spaces in those programs. Many highly qualified applicants are denied entry because there are just not enough seats. What happens to those students? They need also need to be served in their home schools.

Those who are qualified and denied entry to HGCs is a legitimate topic for discussion at the GT forum. IT MUST BE DISCUSSED.

What is not legitimate is the effort to sneak in a discussion about differentiation and homogeneous grouping for those who are simply well prepared.

I think it is related. Those kids who are qualified and denied entry go back to the home school. Also, MCPS doesn't identify students until 2nd grade, and students can't go to a HGC (if they are accepted) until 4th grade. So you have highly able (and also highly gifted) students in home elementary schools from Kindergarten through the end of 3rd grade - and in some instances if they are denied entry into a HGC due to space issues - after 3rd grade. How are we addressing the needs of this population??? One way would be to group homogeneously by ability.

[Anonymous]

Question about the GT test. My DS tested in the 99 percentile of the 2nd grade global screening and was identified as "gifted and talented" according to that test. We chose not to have him take the January test b/c the GT center was inconvenient and we're happy with his home school. But this discussion makes me wonder: why didn't his home school recommend that we apply him to the GT center. I didn't know that schools actually recommended that some kids apply. (I'm happy with our decision, but I am curious now that I've read about recommendations on this thread).

[Anonymous]

Question about the GT test. My DS tested in the 99 percentile of the 2nd grade global screening and was identified as "gifted and talented" according to that test. We chose not to have him take the January test b/c the GT center was inconvenient and we're happy with his home school. But this discussion makes me wonder: why didn't his home school recommend that we apply him to the GT center. I didn't know that schools actually recommended that some kids apply. (I'm happy with our decision, but I am curious now that I've read about recommendations on this thread).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Thursday meeting is about GT education. That is the kids that get selected for magnets and stuff--even if they don't accept it.

09:32 is trying to sneak in a discussion about kids in the regular classroom claiming it is the "real GT."

I don't think it is the real GT. It may be a real issue but it isn't "real GT." Is 09:32 trying to get MCPS to accept that anyone who does not get selected for GT programs outside the schools if gifted?

There are lots and lots of kids who apply to magnets who are not accepted and many, many of those who are not accepted are highly-able and qualified to perform at the magnet level. The TPMS magnet accepts 125 kids (25 slots reserved for in-boundary students). This year, 800+ applied. Do you really think that ALL of those not accepted are not qualified? How about those who tested, on the entrance exam, one point below the cutoff? How about kids from a given school, from which there were too many applicants (TPMS has said publicly that they don't want to take too many applicants from one school)? How about HGC kids who don't quite make it (ditto, they don't take too many HGC kids)?

The point is, in the regular classroom, especially in the eastern part of MoCo, there are lots of highly-able kids who NEED differentiation, who NEED the challenge of enriched instruction. They need that as much as low-performing students need extra help - and under state law, they are entitled to it.

Yes, there are highly able kids who are rotting in regular school. There are gifted children who have to stay in the regular school because of a lack of seats or they chose not to go to a HGC/magnet. But tomorrow's forum is on GT. If we want to talk about GT kids left in the regular classroom for whatever reason--DIFFERENTIATION WONT CUT IT. HOMOGENEOUS GROUPING WONT CUT IT-because there aren't enough of them in a given school.

For the students who come in well prepared from the eastern part or the western part of the counties, in school homogeneous grouping may work. But that is another issue, right?

But why can't you see that it's not all or nothing? We need a comprehensive approach -- magnets for HG kids, differentiation for kids who need extra challenge in home schools, and grade skipping when appropriate.

Why can't you see that other people have needs and approaches that are different from yours? This isn't about your single-minded, self-centered campaigns for your "student letter" or whatever you call it.

I see the PP's point. You first try to argue about the definition of gifted then you turn around and want to talk about " differentiation for kids who need extra challenge in home schools." What PP is saying is that the forum is for GT. It might be good to keep on topic. My kids need challenge in the regular classroom--with the Ver. 2.0 (Is that what you call the student letter?) and I'd like to have a forum dedicated to that topic alone. There is a lot to discuss. And please don't bring your name calling and personal attacks here--it just makes you seem like you don't have anything useful left to say.

Why did you go around trying to argue GT defined kids who came prepared well if you just wanted to advocate for extra challenges for some of 'em?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Thursday meeting is about GT education. That is the kids that get selected for magnets and stuff--even if they don't accept it.

09:32 is trying to sneak in a discussion about kids in the regular classroom claiming it is the "real GT."

I don't think it is the real GT. It may be a real issue but it isn't "real GT." Is 09:32 trying to get MCPS to accept that anyone who does not get selected for GT programs outside the schools if gifted?

There are lots and lots of kids who apply to magnets who are not accepted and many, many of those who are not accepted are highly-able and qualified to perform at the magnet level. The TPMS magnet accepts 125 kids (25 slots reserved for in-boundary students). This year, 800+ applied. Do you really think that ALL of those not accepted are not qualified? How about those who tested, on the entrance exam, one point below the cutoff? How about kids from a given school, from which there were too many applicants (TPMS has said publicly that they don't want to take too many applicants from one school)? How about HGC kids who don't quite make it (ditto, they don't take too many HGC kids)?

The point is, in the regular classroom, especially in the eastern part of MoCo, there are lots of highly-able kids who NEED differentiation, who NEED the challenge of enriched instruction. They need that as much as low-performing students need extra help - and under state law, they are entitled to it.

Yes, there are highly able kids who are rotting in regular school. There are gifted children who have to stay in the regular school because of a lack of seats or they chose not to go to a HGC/magnet. But tomorrow's forum is on GT. If we want to talk about GT kids left in the regular classroom for whatever reason--DIFFERENTIATION WONT CUT IT. HOMOGENEOUS GROUPING WONT CUT IT-because there aren't enough of them in a given school.

For the students who come in well prepared from the eastern part or the western part of the counties, in school homogeneous grouping may work. But that is another issue, right?

But why can't you see that it's not all or nothing? We need a comprehensive approach -- magnets for HG kids, differentiation for kids who need extra challenge in home schools, and grade skipping when appropriate.

Why can't you see that other people have needs and approaches that are different from yours? This isn't about your single-minded, self-centered campaigns for your "student letter" or whatever you call it.

I see the PP's point. You first try to argue about the definition of gifted then you turn around and want to talk about " differentiation for kids who need extra challenge in home schools." What PP is saying is that the forum is for GT. It might be good to keep on topic. My kids need challenge in the regular classroom--with the Ver. 2.0 (Is that what you call the student letter?) and I'd like to have a forum dedicated to that topic alone. There is a lot to discuss. And please don't bring your name calling and personal attacks here--it just makes you seem like you don't have anything useful left to say.

Why did you go around trying to argue GT defined kids who came prepared well if you just wanted to advocate for extra challenges for some of 'em?

You wouldn't want to go to the Special education forum and ask for what you want would you? If you really want a comprehensive approach then we must include that group. Star has separate forums so that he can address each issue. I think PP is making the point that you must stick to the issue instead of sneaking your pet peeve into another forum.